Edhat Staff
Central Coast poised to become home to the nation’s third-largest sanctuary with backing of local representatives and Indigenous groups
California representatives and senators, including Congressman Salud Carbajal, Senator Alex Padilla, Congresswoman Julia Brownley, and Congressman Jimmy Panetta, acclaimed the advancement of the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary’s federal designation. With the Biden-Harris Administration’s release of the conclusive environmental impact study, the completion of this long-awaited sanctuary designation is anticipated by the close of the year.
Congressman Salud Carbajal remarked with optimism, “The Central Coast’s pursuit of this sanctuary designation spans decades. This historic designation is timely, offering our oceans and communities significant protection amidst environmental changes. The sanctuary marks a remarkable era for regional conservation, protecting a vast stretch of the Central Coast.”
Senator Padilla recognized the pivotal nature of this announcement, identifying the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary as critical for environmental conservation, local Indigenous peoples, and sustainable offshore wind development. He emphasized his commitment to pushing the final designation across the finish line.
Congresswoman Julia Brownley reflected upon the sanctuary’s expected benefits for her constituents, who anticipate the sanctuary to honor Native American lineage and protect both marine life and economies dependent on coastal resources. “The designation’s progress is a cooperative achievement, emphasizing the importance of our shared marine and cultural histories,” said Rep. Brownley.
Congressman Jimmy Panetta pointed out NOAA’s careful consideration of diverse viewpoints, ensuring a balanced approach amidst conservation and renewable energy initiatives. “The release of the Final Environmental Impact Statement brings us closer to safeguarding the marine ecosystem unique to the Central Coast while supporting clean energy aspirations.”
The sanctuary, spanning 4,543 square miles from Gaviota to southern San Luis Obispo County, will be the largest federally protected marine area on the U.S. Pacific Coast. This triumph represents the first marine sanctuary proposed by a local tribe and is positioned within California’s 24th Congressional District.
NOAA’s plan also outlines a potential expansion to integrate the sanctuary with existing maritime protected zones, fostering continuity with Monterey Bay and Channel Islands sanctuaries.
Congressman Carbajal, a staunch advocate for the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, applauded the progression that began with advocacy in 2017 and has led to current developments under the Biden-Harris Administration. He has also championed a balance between sanctuary conservation and floating offshore wind development.
The release of the final environmental impact statement (Volume I & Volume II) marks a historic point for the first Indigenous-led sanctuary nominee, with NOAA’s final decision due in October 2024. Following a mandatory 30-day waiting period, if the designation proceeds, NOAA will finalize the sanctuary’s regulatory framework and officially inaugurate it.
For further details and regular updates regarding the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, members of the public are invited to visit NOAA’s Marine Sanctuary webpage.
Hooray!
apparently there aren’t enough protections in place that it requires some cultural/sanctuary designation. California is a sanctuary state, might as well as expand it to include the sea and air too
Yes, we seem to have a lot of wise policies, forward-looking and beneficial to our populace.
you must have been crushed when Newsom vetoed the bill that would have provided illegal immigrants access to tax payer funded home loans
You would prefer they be homeless?
Probably one of those geniuses that think “hard working Americans” don’t have access to the same types of loans if they qualify.
I prefer they be sent back to their own country. Why should my tax dollars pay for them
You wouldn’t be here if people in the past had been as xenophobic and jingoistic as you are.
My parents were LEGAL immigrants.
How is that relevant to the statement? Xenophobia and jingoism affect immigration policy. Your parents were allowed to immigrate; many other people weren’t. In any case, you’re a net drain on society.
OOPS – why are you against hard working immigrants?
I am against ILLEGAL immigrants, not legal ones. There is a huge distinction and you are blending the 2 and using it for spin
No, OOPS, I’m just asking you a question. You are opposed to loans for illegal immigrants who trying to buy homes. Those are hard working people, despite how they got here. They’re trying to achieve the American Dream. Why are you against them? Simply because they weren’t able to get here “legally?” They’re still here and working hard to make our country better and paying their taxes. Why shouldn’t they get a shot?
Your comment on this article about sanctuary makes it clear that you’re against indigenous people. Racists can declare that they are ok with legal immigration but we know it’s not true.
They make this a better place. You make it a worse place.
Tell us, just how much do you “pay for” undocumented immigrants?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/4-myths-about-how-immigrants-affect-the-u-s-economy
WTF does that have to do with protecting the Ocean? Stop obsessing.
Again, the educated right spewing compassion.
Please keep your comments relevant to the topic.
See what I was saying about education and the left?
Oops has definitely derailed things off topic with his brainwashed jingoism, but if you look at the economic statistics, immigrants, documented or undocumented, are a driving force for growing our economy, and less likely to break the law than citizens are. If you want to advocate for your own prosperity, the more, the merrier.
Good and bad. It sounds great to a lot of folks, but they never get out on the ocean to fish. The feds and our state are steadily chipping away at fishing access. Newsom’s ‘30 by 30’ plan is being actively fought by sport fishing industry groups. It’s a slippery slope, and they’re looking to slide on it as far as they can. I surely hope this doesn’t turn into a big land grab/access shutdown. The big money enviro groups like the Sierra Club would have it that way, I’ll tell you that, and they got bank.
Once again, BASIC, this isn’t going to affect fishing. Who are the people here it “sounds great to” who “never get out on the ocean to fish?” The Chumash?
Slippery slope is a logical fallacy for a lot of reasons.
I’m very glad we set aside certain areas and call them special and protect them. I’ll never meet one I don’t like. If we can also find ways to use them for benign purposes without harming them that’s also good. The fact is that all of nature should be protected and not abused or harmed, as it is all special with unique beauty and purpose. “Do no harm” should an engrained way of thinking about and behaving towards nature, not requiring a years long government decree. But I’m certainly not complaining! Government gets it right when it works for everyone, so bravo!
The Florida keys national marine sanctuary has so many regulations.
I can only imagine what a Chumash marine sanctuary will have.
No thank you.
Franky I’m fed up with all the money and concessions we give the indigenous population.
DAVID0593 – WOW. That’s might white of you. Frankly, I bet indigenous populations are pretty fed up with all the land and lives your ancestors took from them.
Frankly, you almost certainly don’t know shit about what “we give” the indigenous population.
Beyond that, your opinion really doesn’t matter.
What with imagined regulations, and “all the money and concessions we give the indigenous population”, this has to be one of the most ignorant points of view I’ve ever seen.
And who’s Franky?
He’s the poster child of the educated right.
It’s remarkable that someone would want to publicly display that they are the sort of person who would make such a comment.